Back
2019 Supreme(Ori) 120
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S.K. Sahoo, J.
Ballav Kr @ Sriballav Kar - Appellant
Vs.
Govt Of India And Another - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 3426 of 2018
Decided On : 05-08-2019
Ramani Kanta Pattnaik, Adv., B.C. Parija, Adv., R.R. Rout, Adv., M. Routray, Adv., P. Mallik, Adv., Anup Kumar Bose, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for written permission from the concerned Court for individuals facing criminal proceedings to depart from India, as per the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, and relevant notifications issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.
Headnote:
Passport - Criminal Proceedings - Passports Act, 1967 - Section 6(2)(f) - Summary of Acts and Sections: Passports Act, 1967, Section 6(2)(f) - The court discussed the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, and the notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, highlighting the requirement for written permission from the concerned Court for an individual facing criminal proceedings to depart from India. The court referred to relevant case laws to emphasize that the passport authority cannot reject the application for a passport solely on the ground of pending criminal cases if the applicant obtains permission from the concerned Criminal Court for traveling outside India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the rejection of the petition for issuance of a no objection certificate to obtain a passport for traveling abroad. The petitioner was facing trial for offenses under sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, related to fraud and cheating of compensation disbursed by the Government in a land acquisition case.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the learned J.M.F.C. (P), Kujang, emphasizing the need for the court to reconsider the petitioner's request for a no objection certificate in light of the relevant provisions under the Passports Act, 1967, and the Rules framed thereunder.
Issues: The delay in the disposal of the trial, the requirement for written permission from the concerned Court for the petitioner to obtain a passport, and the necessity of considering the relevant provisions under the Passports Act, 1967, and the Rules framed thereunder.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement for written permission from the concerned Court for individuals facing criminal proceedings to depart from India, as per the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, and relevant notifications issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the learned J.M.F.C. (P), Kujang, for reconsideration of the petitioner's request for a no objection certificate in accordance with the relevant provisions under the Passports Act, 1967, and the Rules framed thereunder.
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Sahoo, J.
In this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner Ballav Kar @ Sriballav Kar has challenged the impugned order dated 20.12.2018 of the learned J.M.F.C., Jagatsinghpur in G.R. Case No.320 of 2004 in rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner for issuance of no objection certificate in order to obtain the passport in his favour to go abroad i.e. Geneva. While rejecting the petition, the Court has observed that this is a year old case of 2004 and six witnesses out of fifteen charge sheeted witnesses have already been examined and if the petition is allowed, the petitioner may abscond to foreign land or he may not be available in person or his presence may not be procured promptly during vital stages of the criminal proceedings such as accused statement and pronouncement of judgment. It is further mentioned that the particular time limit during which the petitioner would visit Geneva, the purpose and urgency of visit to the foreign land, the exact place of stay, the name of the course of study and the duration of study that the petitioner's son is pursuing at Geneva have not been furnished. The said case arises out of Paradeep P.S. Case No.163 of 2004.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case was instituted in the year 2004 and the petitioner is facing trial for commission of offences under sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons is that they committed fraud and cheating of compensation of whopping money to the tune of Rs.6,57,040.00 disbursed by the Government in land acquisition case. It is contended that there is inordinate delay in disposal of the trial of the case and as reflected in the order dated 20.12.2018, only six witnesses have been examined out of fifteen charge sheeted witnesses till the impugned order was passed and thereafter, the case has suffered number of adjournments but no further witness has been examined. He has filed the certified copy of the up-to-date order sheet which is taken on record. Relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Arjuna Charan Das Vrs. State of Orissa, 2017 (2) OrissaLR 13, it is contended that the impugned order should be set aside and necessary permission and no objection certificate is to be granted to the petitioner so that it can be produced before the passport authorities.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that in view of the provisions under section 6(2)(f) of the Passports Act, 1967, the passport authority shall refuse to issue passport, inter alia, if any proceeding in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by the applicant is pending before the criminal Court in India. The Passport Application Form which was issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs as per form No. EA (P)-13 indicates in Column No.8 that the applicant has to indicate if he was ever charged with criminal proceedings or any arrest warrant/summon is pending before a Court in India and if the answer is 'yes', then the applicant will fill in Column No.7.1 of the Supplementary Form which indicates that if there are any criminal proceedings/warrant pending against the applicant then written permission from the Court is to be attached to depart from India.
4. Mr. Anup Kumar Bose, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for Union of India produced the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi dated 25.08.1993 wherein it is indicated that in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of section 22 of the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and in super session of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs no.G.S.R.298 (E), dated the 14th April, 1976, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary in public interest to do so, exempted citizens of India against whom proceedings in respect of
